The etymological origin of anarchism derives from ancient Greek word anarkhia. Anarkhia meant "without a ruler" as it was composed by the prefix a (i.e. "without") and the word arkhos (i.e. leader or ruler). The suffix -ism is used to denote the ideological current that favours anarchism.[11] The first known use of this word was in 1642.[12] Various factions within the French Revolution labelled opponents as anarchists although few shared many views of later anarchists. There would be many revolutionaries of the early 19th century who contributed to the anarchist doctrines of the next generation, such as William Godwin and Wilhelm Weitling, but they did not use the word anarchist or anarchism in describing themselves or their beliefs.[13]

While opposition to the state is central, defining anarchism is not an easy task as there is a lot of talk among scholars and anarchists on the matter and various currents perceive anarchism slightly differently.[18] Hence, it might be true to say that anarchism is a cluster of political philosophies opposing authority and hierarchical organization (including the state, capitalism, nationalism and all associated institutions) in the conduct of all human relations in favour of a society based on voluntary association, freedom and decentralisation, but this definition has its own shortcomings as the definition based on etymology (which is simply a negation of a ruler), or based on anti-statism (anarchism is much more than that) or even the anti-authoritarian (which is an a posteriori concussion).[19] Major elements of the definition of anarchism include: a) the will for a non coercive society; b) the rejection of the state apparatus; c) belief in human nature, although it is even harder to define it than anarchism; and d) a suggestion on how to act to pursue the ideal of anarchy.[20]

During the prehistoric era of mankind, an established authority did not exist. It was after the creation of towns and cities that hierarchy was invented and anarchistic ideas espoused as a reaction.[22] Most notable examples of anarchism in the ancient world were in China and Greece. In China, philosophical anarchism, meaning peaceful delegitimizing of the state, was delineated by Taoist philosophers (i.e. Zhuangzi and Lao Tzu).[23] Likewise in Greece, anarchist attitudes were articulated by tragedians and philosophers. Aeschylus and Sophocles used the myth of Antigone to illustrate the conflict between rules set by the state and personal autonomy. Socrates questioned Athenian authorities constantly and insisted to the right of individual freedom of consciousness. Cynics dismissed human law (Nomos) and associated authorities while trying to live according to nature (physis). Stoics were supportive of a society based on unofficial and friendly relations among its citizens without the presence of a state.[24]

During the Middle Ages, there was no anarchistic activity except some ascetic religious movements in the Islamic world or in Christian Europe. This kind of tradition later gave birth to religious anarchism. In Persia, a Zoroastrian Prophet known as Mazdak was calling for an egalitarian society and the abolition of monarchy, but he soon found himself executed by the king.[25] In Basra, religious sects preached against the state. In Europe, various sects developed anti-state and libertarian tendencies. Those currents were the precursor of religious anarchism in the centuries to come. It was in the Renaissance and with the spread of reasoning and humanism through Europe that libertarian ideas emerged. Writers were outlining in their novels ideal societies that were based not on coercion but voluntarism. The Enlightenment further pushed towards anarchism with the optimism for social progress.

Michael Bakunin took mutualism and extended it to collectivist anarchism. Bakunin's current (Jura Federation) entered the class worker union called the International Workingmen's Association (IWA), later known as the First International, formed in 1864 to unite diverse revolutionary currents. Due to its links to active workers' movements, the International became a significant organisation. Karl Marx became a leading figure in the International and a member of its General Council. Proudhon's followers, the mutualists, opposed Marx's state socialism, advocating political abstentionism and small property holdings.[28] Bakunin's followers entered a bitter dispute with Karl Marx which ended with the split of the workers movement that officially took place in the Fifth Congress of the IWA in the Hague, 1872.[29] The major reason lay in fundamentally different approaches on how the workers would emancipate themselves. Marx was advocating for the creation of a political party to take part in electoral struggles whereas Bakunin thought that the whole set of Marx's thinking was very authoritarian.[30] Bakunin is famous for predicting that if such a party would gain power by Marxist's terms, it would end up to be the new tyrant of workers. After being expelled from the IWA, anarchists formed the St. Imier International. Under the influence of Peter Kropotkin, a Russian philosopher and scientist, anarcho-communism overlapped collectivism.[31] Anarcho-communists, who drew inspiration from the 1871 Paris Commune, advocated for free federation and distribution of goods according to one needs.[32] The major argument of anarcho-communism was that Bakunian perspective would lead to antagonism among collectives.

At the turning of the century, anarchism has spread all over the world.[33] In China, small groups of students imported the humanistic pro-science version of anarcho-communism.[34] Tokyo was a hotspot for rebellious youth from countries of the far east, pouring into Japanese capital to study.[35] In Latin America, São Paulo was a stronghold and anarchosyndicalism was the most prominent left-wing ideology.[36] During that time, a minority of anarchists embarked into utilizing of violence in order to achieve their political ends. This kind of strategy is named as propaganda by the deed.[37] The dismemberment of the French socialist movement into many groups and the execution and exile of many Communards to penal colonies following the suppression of the Paris Commune favoured individualist political expression and acts.[38] Even though many anarchists distanced themselves to those terrorist acts, anarchists were persecuted and were given bad fame.[37]Illegalism, stealing the possessions of the rich because capitalists were not their rightful owners, was another strategy some anarchist adopted during the same years.[39]

In the Spanish Civil War, anarchists and syndicalists (CNT and FAI) once again allied themselves with various currents of leftists. Spain had a long anarchist tradition and anarchists played an important role in the Civil War. In response to the army rebellion, an anarchist-inspired movement of peasants and workers, supported by armed militias, took control of Barcelona and of large areas of rural Spain where they collectivised the land.[42] The Soviet Union provided some limited assistance at the beginning of the Civil War, but as Joseph Stalin tried to seize control of the Republicans the result was a bitter fight among communists and anarchists (i.e. at a series of events named May Days).[43]

Anarchist schools of thought had been generally grouped in two main historical traditions (individualist anarchism and social anarchism) which have some different origins, values and evolution.[51] The individualist wing of anarchism emphasises negative liberty (opposition to state or social control over the individual) while those in the social wing emphasise positive liberty to achieve one's potential and argue that humans have needs that society ought to fulfil, "recognising equality of entitlement".[52] In a chronological and theoretical sense, there are classical—those created throughout the 19th century—and post-classical anarchist schools—those created since the mid-20th century and after.

Beyond the specific factions of anarchist thought is philosophical anarchism which the theoretical stance that the state lacks moral legitimacy without accepting the imperative of revolution to eliminate it. A component especially of individualist anarchism,[53] philosophical anarchism may accept the existence of a minimal state as unfortunate and usually temporary, necessary evil, but argue that citizens do not have a moral obligation to obey the state when its laws conflict with individual autonomy.[54] One reaction against sectarianism within the anarchist milieu was anarchism without adjectives, a call for toleration first adopted by Fernando Tarrida del Mármol in 1889 in response to the bitter debates of anarchist theory at the time.[55] In abandoning the hyphenated anarchisms (i.e. collectivist-, communist-, mutualist- and individualist-anarchism), it sought to emphasise the anti-authoritarian beliefs common to all anarchist schools of thought.[56] The various anarchist schools of thought or currents are not distinct entities, but intermingle with each other.[57]

Mutualism began in 18th-century English and French labour movements before taking an anarchist form associated with Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in France and others in the United States.[59] Proudhon proposed spontaneous order, whereby organisation emerges without central authority, a "positive anarchy" where order arises when everybody does "what he wishes and only what he wishes"[60] and where "business transactions alone produce the social order".[61]

Proudhon distinguished between ideal political possibilities and practical governance. For this reason, much in contrast to some of his theoretical statements concerning ultimate spontaneous self-governance, Proudhon was heavily involved in French parliamentary politics and allied himself with the socialist factions of the workers movement. During his life of public service, he began advocating state-protected charters for worker-owned cooperatives and promoting certain nationalisation schemes.[citation needed]

Mutualist anarchism is concerned with reciprocity, free association, voluntary contract, federation and credit and currency reform. According to the American mutualist William Batchelder Greene, each worker in the mutualist system would receive "just and exact pay for his work; services equivalent in cost being exchangeable for services equivalent in cost, without profit or discount".[62] Mutualism has been retrospectively characterised as ideologically situated between individualist and collectivist forms of anarchism.[63] Proudhon first characterised his goal as a "third form of society, the synthesis of communism and property [which] we call LIBERTY".[64]

At the epicentre of collectivist anarchism lies the belief in the potential of humankind for goodness and solidarity which will flourish when oppressive governments are abolished.[67] Collectivist anarchists oppose all private ownership of the means of production, instead advocating that ownership be collectivised. This was to be achieved through violent revolution, first starting with a small cohesive group through acts of violence, or propaganda by the deed, to inspire the workers as a whole to revolt and forcibly collectivise the means of production.[68] However, collectivisation was not to be extended to the distribution of income as workers would be paid according to time worked, rather than receiving goods being distributed according to need as in anarcho-communism. This position was criticised by anarcho-communists as effectively "uphold[ing] the wages system".[69] Collectivist anarchism arose contemporaneously with Marxism, but it opposed the Marxist dictatorship of the proletariat despite the stated Marxist goal of a collectivist stateless society.[70]

Anarchist, communist and collectivist ideas are not mutually exclusive—although the collectivist anarchists advocated compensation for labour, some held out the possibility of a post-revolutionary transition to a communist system of distribution according to need.[71]

Anarcho-communism developed out of radical socialist currents after the French Revolution,[75] but it was first formulated as such in the Italian section of the First International.[76] The theoretical work of Peter Kropotkin took importance later as it expanded and developed pro-organisationalist and insurrectionary anti-organisationalist sections.[77]

Anarcho-syndicalists view labour unions as a potential force for revolutionary social change, replacing capitalism and the state with a new society democratically self-managed by workers. The basic principles of anarcho-syndicalism are workers' solidarity, direct action and workers' self-management. Anarcho-syndicalists believe that only direct action—that is, action concentrated on directly attaining a goal as opposed to indirect action such as electing a representative to a government position—will allow workers to liberate themselves.[81]

Moreover, anarcho-syndicalists believe that workers' organisations (the organisations that struggle against the wage system which in anarcho-syndicalist theory will eventually form the basis of a new society) should be self-managing. They should not have bosses or business agents—rather, the workers should be able to make all the decisions that affect them themselves. Rudolf Rocker was one of the most popular voices in the anarcho-syndicalist movement. He outlined a view of the origins of the movement, what it sought and why it was important to the future of labour in his 1938 pamphlet Anarcho-Syndicalism. The International Workers Association is an international anarcho-syndicalist federation of various labour unions from different countries. The Spanish CNT played and still plays a major role in the Spanish labour movement. It was also an important force in the Spanish Civil War.[82]

Individualist anarchism refers to several traditions of thought within the anarchist movement that emphasise the individual and their will over any kinds of external determinants such as groups, society, traditions and ideological systems.[83] Individualist anarchism is not a single philosophy, but it instead refers to a group of individualistic philosophies that sometimes are in conflict.

In 1793, William Godwin, who has often been cited as the first anarchist, wrote Political Justice, which some consider the first expression of anarchism.[84] Godwin was a philosophical anarchist and from a rationalist and utilitarian basis opposed revolutionary action and saw a minimal state as a present "necessary evil" that would become increasingly irrelevant and powerless by the gradual spread of knowledge.[85] Godwin advocated individualism, proposing that all cooperation in labour be eliminated on the premise that this would be most conducive with the general good.[86]

An influential form of individualist anarchism called egoism,[87] or egoist anarchism, was expounded by one of the earliest and best-known proponents of individualist anarchism, the German Max Stirner.[88] Stirner's The Ego and Its Own, published in 1844, is a founding text of the philosophy.[88] According to Stirner, the only limitation on the rights of individuals is their power to obtain what they desire without regard for God, state, or morality.[89] To Stirner, rights were "spooks" in the mind and he held that society does not exist, but "the individuals are its reality".[90] Stirner advocated self-assertion and foresaw unions of egoists, non-systematic associations continually renewed by all parties' support through an act of will,[91] which Stirner proposed as a form of organisation in place of the state.[92] Egoist anarchists argue that egoism will foster genuine and spontaneous union between individuals.[93] "Egoism" has inspired many interpretations of Stirner's philosophy. It was re-discovered and promoted by German philosophical anarchist and homosexual activist John Henry Mackay.

Josiah Warren was a pioneer American anarcho-individualist, who drew inspiration from Proudhon.[94]Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862) was an important early influence in individualist anarchist thought in the United States and Europe. Thoreau was an American author, poet, naturalist, tax resister, development critic, surveyor, historian, philosopher and leading transcendentalist. He is best known for his books Walden, a reflection upon simple living in natural surroundings, as well as his essay, Civil Disobedience, an argument for individual resistance to civil government in moral opposition to an unjust state. Benjamin Tucker later fused Stirner's egoism with the economics of Warren and Proudhon in his eclectic influential publication Liberty.

Anarchist principles undergird contemporary radical social movements of the left. Interest in the anarchist movement developed alongside momentum in the anti-globalization movement,[100] whose leading activist networks were anarchist in orientation.[101] As the movement shaped 21st century radicalism, wider embrace of anarchist principles signaled a revival of interest.[101] Contemporary news coverage which emphasizes black bloc demonstrations has reinforced anarchism's historical association with chaos and violence, though its publicity has also led more scholars to engage with the anarchist movement.[100] Anarchism continues to generate many philosophies and movements, at times eclectic, drawing upon various sources and syncretic, combining disparate concepts to create new philosophical approaches.[102]

Insurrectionary anarchism is a revolutionary theory, practice and tendency within the anarchist movement which emphasises insurrection within anarchist practice. Critical of formal organisations such as labour unions and federations that are based on a political programme and periodic congresses, insurrectionary anarchists instead advocate informal organisation and small affinity group based organisation as well as putting value in attack, permanent class conflict and a refusal to negotiate or compromise with class enemies.

Green anarchism, or eco-anarchism, is a school of thought within anarchism that emphasises environmental issues,[104] with an important precedent in anarcho-naturism[105] and whose main contemporary currents are anarcho-primitivism and social ecology. Writing from a green anarchist perspective, John Zerzan attributes the ills of today's social degradation to technology and the birth of agricultural civilization.[106] While Layla AbdelRahim argues that "the shift in human consciousness was also a shift in human subsistence strategies, whereby some human animals reinvented their narrative to center murder and predation and thereby institutionalize violence".[107] According to AbdelRahim, civilization was the result of the human development of technologies and grammar for predatory economics. Language and literacy, she claims, are some of these technologies.[108]

Platformism is a tendency within the wider anarchist movement based on the organisational theories in the tradition of Dielo Truda's Organisational Platform of the General Union of Anarchists (Draft).[112] The document was based on the experiences of Russian anarchists in the 1917 October Revolution which led eventually to the victory of the Bolsheviks over the anarchists and other groups. The Platform attempted to address and explain the anarchist movement's failures during the Russian Revolution.

Post-left anarchy is a recent current in anarchist thought that promotes a critique of anarchism's relationship to traditional left-wing politics. Some post-leftists seek to escape the confines of ideology in general also presenting a critique of organisations and morality. Influenced by the work of Max Stirner and by the Marxist Situationist International, post-left anarchy is marked by a focus on social insurrection and a rejection of leftist social organisation.[113]

Anarcha-feminism, also called anarchist feminism and anarcho-feminism, combines anarchism with feminism. It generally views patriarchy as a manifestation of involuntary coercive hierarchy that should be replaced by decentralised free association. Anarcha-feminists believe that the struggle against patriarchy is an essential part of class struggle and the anarchist struggle against the state. In essence, the philosophy sees anarchist struggle as a necessary component of feminist struggle and vice versa. Anarcha-feminists espoused to a detailed analysis of patriarchy and claim that oppression has its roots to social norms.[118]

Anarcha-feminism began with the late 19th-century writings of early feminist anarchists such as Emma Goldman and Voltairine de Cleyre.[119]Mujeres Libres was an anarchist women's organisation in Spain that aimed to empower working class women, based on the idea of a double struggle for women's liberation and social revolution and argued that the two objectives were equally important and should be pursued in parallel. In order to gain mutual support, they created networks of women anarchists.[120] The second wave of anarcha-feminism arose in the 1960s.[121]

An important current within anarchism is free love.[124] In Europe, the main propagandist of free love within individualist anarchism was Emile Armand. He proposed the concept of la camaraderie amoureuse to speak of free love as the possibility of voluntary sexual encounter between consenting adults. He was also a consistent proponent of polyamory.[125] In Germany, the Stirnerists Adolf Brand and John Henry Mackay were pioneering campaigners for the acceptance of male bisexuality and homosexuality. More recently, the British anarcho-pacifist Alex Comfort gained notoriety during the sexual revolution for writing the bestseller sex manual The Joy of Sex. The issue of free love has a dedicated treatment in the work of French anarcho-hedonist philosopher Michel Onfray in such works as Théorie du corps amoureux. Pour une érotique solaire (2000) and L'invention du plaisir. Fragments cyréaniques (2002).

English anarchist William Godwin considered education an important aspect. He was against state education as he considered those schools as a way of the state to replicate privileges of the ruling class.[126] Godwin thought that education was the way to change the world. In his Political Justice, he criticises state sponsored schooling and advocates for child's protection from coercion.[127] Max Stirner wrote in 1842 a long essay on education called The False Principle of our Education in which Stirner was advocating for child's autonomy.[128]

In 1901, Catalan anarchist and free thinker Francesc Ferrer i Guàrdia established modern or progressive schools in Barcelona in defiance of an educational system controlled by the Catholic Church.[129] Ferrer's approach was secular, rejecting both the state and church involvement in the educational process and gave pupils plenty of autonomy (i.e. on setting the curriculum). Ferrer was aiming to educate the working class. The school closed after constant harassment by the state and Ferrer was later on arrested.[130] Ferrer's ideas generally formed the inspiration for a series of modern schools in the United States,[129]

Russian Christian anarchist Leo Tolstoy established a school for peasant children on his estate.[131] Tolstoy's educational experiments were short-lived due to harassment by the Tsarist secret police.[132] Tolstoy established a conceptual difference between education and culture.[131] He thought that "[e]ducation is the tendency of one man to make another just like himself. [...] Education is culture under restraint, culture is free. [Education is] when the teaching is forced upon the pupil, and when then instruction is exclusive, that is when only those subjects are taught which the educator regards as necessary".[131] For him, "without compulsion, education was transformed into culture".[131]

A more recent libertarian tradition on education is that of unschooling and the free school in which child-led activity replaces pedagogic approaches. Experiments in Germany led to A. S. Neill founding what became Summerhill School in 1921.[133] Summerhill is often cited as an example of anarchism in practice.[134] However, although Summerhill and other free schools are radically libertarian, they differ in principle from those of Ferrer by not advocating an overtly political class struggle-approach.[135] In addition to organising schools according to libertarian principles, anarchists have also questioned the concept of schooling per se. The term deschooling was popularised by Ivan Illich, who argued that the school as an institution is dysfunctional for self-determined learning and serves the creation of a consumer society instead.[136]

Objection to the state and its institutions is sine qua non of anarchism.[137] Anarchists consider the government as a tool of domination and it is illegitimate regardless of political tendencies. Instead of people being able to control the aspects of their life, major decisions are taken by a small elite. Authority ultimately rests solely on power regardless if it is open or transparent as it still has the ability to coerce people. Another anarchist argument against states is that some people constituting a government, even the most altruistic among officials, will unavoidably seek to gain more power, leading to corruption. Anarchists consider the argument that the state is the collective will of people as a fairy tale since the ruling class is distinct from the rest of the society.[138]

Anarchist perspectives towards violence have always been perplexed and controversial.[139] On one hand, anarcho-pacifists point out the unity of means and ends.[140] On the other hand, other groups of anarchist are for direct action that can include sabotage or even terrorism. Emma Goldman and Errico Malatesta, who were proponents of limited use of violence, were arguing that violence is merely a reaction to state violence as a necessary evil. Peace activist and anarchist April Carter argues that violence is incompatible with anarchism because it is mostly associated with the state and authority as violence is immanent to the state. As the state's capability to exercise violence is colossal nowadays, a rebellion or civil war would probably end in another authoritarian institute.[141]

Anarchist tactics vary considerably. A broad categorization would be the preference of revolutionary tactics to destroy oppressive States and institutions or aiming to change society through evolutionary means. Revolutionary methods can take violent form as they did in past insurgencies (i.e., in Spain, Mexico, Russia) or during violent protests by militant protestors such as the black bloc, who are generally much less violent than revolutionary movements a century ago. Anarchists also commonly employ direct action, which can take the form of disrupting and protesting against unjust hierarchies, or the form of self-managing their lives through the creation of counterinstitutions such as communes and non-hierarchical collectives.[142] Often decision-making is handled in an anti-authoritarian way, with everyone having equal say in each decision, an approach known as horizontalism. Another aspect of anarchist tactics is their aim to strengthen social bonds through common actions.[143]

Reclaiming public space by anarchists is another method of creating social spaces and creating squats in order to organise themselves. During important events such as protests, when spaces are being occupied, they are often called
"Temporary Autonomous Zones" (TAZ).[144]

Anarchism is evaluated as unfeasible or utopian by its critics, often in general and formal debate. European history professor Carl Landauer argued that social anarchism is unrealistic and that government is a "lesser evil" than a society without "repressive force". He also argued that "ill intentions will cease if repressive force disappears" is an "absurdity".[145] However, An Anarchist FAQ states the following: "Anarchy is not a utopia, [and] anarchists make no such claims about human perfection. [...] Remaining disputes would be solved by reasonable methods, for example, the use of juries, mutual third parties, or community and workplace assemblies". It also states that "some sort of 'court' system would still be necessary to deal with the remaining crimes and to adjudicate disputes between citizens".[146]

Here too the co-operation of an infinite number of individuals is absolutely necessary, and this co-operation must be practised during precisely fixed hours so that no accidents may happen. Here, too, the first condition of the job is a dominant will that settles all subordinate questions, whether this will is represented by a single delegate or a committee charged with the execution of the resolutions of the majority of persona interested. In either case there is a very pronounced authority. Moreover, what would happen to the first train dispatched if the authority of the railway employees over the Hon. passengers were abolished?

In the end, it is argued that authority in any form is a natural occurrence which should not be abolished.[149]

^Copleston 2003, p. 69; Supek 1975, p. 94: The exact quote of Proudhon is the following: "The notion of anarchy in politics is just as rational and positive as any other. It means that once industrial functions have taken over from political functions, then business transactions alone produce the social order" (1864).

^Heywood 2017, pp. 146–147; Bakunin 1990:"They [the Marxists] maintain that only a dictatorship—their dictatorship, of course—can create the will of the people, while our answer to this is: No dictatorship can have any other aim but that of self-perpetuation, and it can beget only slavery in the people tolerating it; freedom can be created only by freedom, that is, by a universal rebellion on the part of the people and free organization of the toiling masses from the bottom up".

^Berkman 1929: Berkman explains: "The revolution abolishes private ownership of the means of production and distribution, and with it goes capitalistic business. Personal possession remains only in the things you use. Thus, your watch is your own, but the watch factory belongs to the people".

^Bookchin 2009: Bookchin's quote: "This process of education and class organization, more than any single factor in Spain, produced the collectives. And to the degree that the CNT-FAI (for the two organizations became fatally coupled after July 1936) exercised the major influence in an area, the collectives proved to be generally more durable, communist and resistant to Stalinist counterrevolution than other republican-held areas of Spain".

^Meltzer 2000, p. 50: "The philosophy of "anarcho-capitalism" dreamed up by the "libertarian" New Right, has nothing to do with Anarchism as known by the Anarchist movement proper.";
Marshall 1993, p. 565: "In fact, few anarchists would accept the 'anarcho-capitalists' into the anarchist camp since they do not share a concern for economic equality and social justice, Their self-interested, calculating market men would be incapable of practising voluntary co-operation and mutual aid. Anarcho-capitalists, even if they do reject the State, might therefore best be called right-wing libertarians rather than anarchists.";
Newman 2010, p. 53: "It is important to distinguish between anarchism and certain strands of right-wing libertarianism which at times go by the same name (for example, Murray Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism).";
Goodway 2006, p. 4: "'Libertarian' and 'libertarianism' are frequently employed by anarchists as synonyms for 'anarchist' and 'anarchism', largely as an attempt to distance themselves from the negative connotations of 'anarchy' and its derivatives. The situation has been vastly complicated in recent decades with the rise of anarcho-capitalism, 'minimal statism' and an extreme right-wing laissez-faire philosophy advocated by such theorists as Murray Rothbard and Robert Nozick and their adoption of the words 'libertarian' and 'libertarianism'. It has therefore now become necessary to distinguish between their right libertarianism and the left libertarianism of the anarchist tradition".